Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 Apollo 10/31/84; site apollo.uucp Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!wivax!apollo!wendya From: wendya@apollo.uucp (Wendy Alberts) Newsgroups: net.news Subject: Objection to annonymous postings Message-ID: <22f826c6.708@apollo.uucp> Date: Wed, 14-Nov-84 20:20:06 EST Article-I.D.: apollo.22f826c6.708 Posted: Wed Nov 14 20:20:06 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 16-Nov-84 06:47:19 EST Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, Mass. Lines: 64 Ed Hall, in a recent net.news.group article, states: > Agreed; one very good reason for anonymous postings is the ability to > make sensitive self-revelations. Another, perhaps less-justifiable > one is a posting from someone whose does not want their employer/ > administrator to know about it. > In both cases anonymous postings can contribute to freedom of speach [sic] > without any malicious intent or effect whatever. I am opposed to annonymous postings. I feel very strongly that if you think you want to post something to the net, but you don't want your employer or administrator to know about it, you simply shouldn't post it at all. For one thing, there are other methods and modes of communicating your thoughts/ideas, completely independent of this net. Maybe one of these would be more appropriate and comfortable. (This covers everything from private email or phone calls to letters to the editor, pamphlets dropped by the thousands from airplanes, skywriting, etc.) But, another, more important, objection, is that your employer/administrator is, in most cases, providing you with the opportunity to use the net in the first place. It seems quite underhanded, ungrateful, and highly inappropriate to abuse that opportunity by posting articles you or your employer/administrator might be ashamed of, or for which you have any reason to fear possible repercussions (legal, social, or other). If you have something to say, say it well and take the responsibility - identify yourself! I also maintain that a public, worldwide computer bulletin board network is hardly the forum in which to make "sensitive self-revelations," annonymously or otherwise. I suspect that, at some time in the not-too-distant future, many netters may very well bitterly regret some of their public soul-searching (which, in some cases, borders on exhibitionism). As they seek employment, academic contacts, etc., these netters may find, to their utter and permanent chagrin, that a possibly bizarre and often quite undesirable reputation has preceded them. The ability to post articles annonymously does NOT solve this problem - it exacerbates it by legitimatizing excesses and irresponsibility which should never appear on the net anyway. While realizing the futility of protecting people from themselves, everyone should work together to make the net an environment in which common sense, intelligence, and moderation prevail. On a related subject of somewhat lesser importance... I also object to the gratuitous alteration of header information, even when such alteration seems innocuous or just silly, rather than indicating any real attempt to conceal one's true identity. Examples: (Leo Buscaglia @ your nearest bookstore) (Dish of the Day @ The Restaurant at the End of the Universe) (? @ inside a linked list) These alterations make me work much harder than I should have to in order to find out just where and from whom an article originated. They are particularly annoying when combined with unsigned articles. Again, even if the intention is not to mislead or conceal identity, I belive it is, at best, an impolite and annoying practice. The *very* small amount of humor provided is simply not worth it; in any case, these things tend to become tedious rather quickly. W. Christensen Apollo Computer ...decvax!wivax!apollo!wendya The views expressed here are solely my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Apollo Computer, its management, or its employees.